When we see records being broken and unprecedented events such as this, the onus is on those who deny any connection to climate change to prove their case. Global warming has fundamentally altered the background conditions that give rise to all weather. In the strictest sense, all weather is now connected to climate change. Kevin Trenberth

HIT THE PAGE DOWN KEY TO SEE THE POSTS
Now at 8,800+ articles. HIT THE PAGE DOWN KEY TO SEE THE POSTS

EXXON-MOBIL's success at manipulating the White House and EPA to its own immoral ends -- obscuring the dangers of CO2 emissions

More on Why White House Blocked CO2 Curbs

My colleague Felicity Barringer, who covers the environment for our National desk, has been tracking developments related to the White House fight with some Environmental Protection Agency officials over the need to restrict carbon dioxide. You may recall her story last month about how the White House refused to open an e-mail carrying the E.P.A. “finding” supporting CO2 restrictions. She sends this new dispatch:

More details are emerging about the maneuvers that blocked the Environmental Protection Agency’s finding that greenhouse gases were a threat to public health and welfare and should be regulated.

White House officials initially blessed the agency’s efforts to create a basis for restricting emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas produced by human activities, but reversed course after passage of an energy bill last December, a former agency official has told a Congressional committee. He said the White House was won over by the argument, pushed by oil companies and others, that such regulation should not be part of the Bush legacy,

The official, Jason K. Burnett, once a Bush appointee and now an Obama supporter, told the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming that the argument for putting off any carbon dioxide limits was made by “individuals working for particular oil companies, Exxon Mobil,” as well as oil industry trade associations.

He also told the committee that the electric power industry, particularly the Edison Electric Institute, “thought their members would be better served by getting out in front and actively engaging” regulators trying to shape future controls, “rather than trying to fight what they judge to be inevitable.”

A transcript of his statement will be made public by the committee Friday morning. A copy was seen by The New York Times Thursday night. In much of it, Mr. Burnett elaborated on information that has already been made public.

The E.P.A.’s effort to create a framework for regulating greenhouse gases was begun in response to a Supreme Court decision in the spring of 2007. That decision required the agency either to regulate the pollutants or explain why it was not doing so.

The White House’s wishes, Mr. Burnett said, were conveyed to Stephen Johnson by Joel Kaplan, the deputy chief of staff. In mid-November, Mr. Kaplan gave a go-ahead for the E.P.A. to proceed with its plan to propose that greenhouse gases could and should be regulated; on Dec. 5, after the regulatory document doing that had been sent to the Office of Management and Budget for review, he told Mr. Johnson to retract it.

According to Mr. Burnett, Mr. Johnson refused. The O.M.B. subsequently refused to open the e-mail to which the document was attached.